tv The O Reilly Factor FOX News August 28, 2013 1:00am-2:01am PDT
>> bill: the o'reilly factor is on. tonight: >> there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical sweps front. >> bill: now the president must act on that threat. but what should he do? i will analyze with ralph peters, david hunt and charles krauthammer. >> voter i.d. why would we want to get obama do we need some special i.d.? >> bill: why is it the civil rights industry talking about black-on-black crime. we will tell you you tonight. i too want to tell everyone that i'm sorry that this happened. >> bill: george zimmerman wants the state of florida to pay some of his legal bills.
outrageous or justified? is it legal will testify us. caution. you are about to enter the no spin zone. the factor begins right now. >> bill: hi, i'm boiler. thanks for watching us tonight. syria.resident obama should that is the subject of this evening's talking points memo. this man, syrian dictator bashar al assad is a war criminal, a mass murderer and a baby killer. by using poison gas on syrian civilians which is against the geneva convention, asatisfied is now responsible for thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths. according to the humanitarian group, doctors without borders. so there is no question that assad must be held accountable. if you believe in american exceptionalism that this country has a moral obligation to save lives when it can all over the world, then you know the
u.s.a. must act against assad as it did against saddam hussein. however, we cannot make the same mistakes we made in iraq. president obama is now perceived throughout the world as indecisive when it comes to writing international wrongs. putin and russia, the chinese and iran do not fear him. those countries do pretty much what they want to too. in this case that means supporting the mass killer assad. so, mr. obama a unique opportunity not only to damage assad but to show the world that we are the good guys and that those helping assad are the bad guys. in order to do that the president must be methodical. first, he must convince other countries to support military strikes against syria. seems british, french and turks are already on board. so that's a huge plus. but the president should secure the support as many arab countries as possible beginning beginning with saudi arabia. then president obama should go to congress and ask for a vote affirmation of using military power. talking points believes congress will support the
action. the u.s. a should devise a bombing campaign that will degrade assad's forces without the mass killing of civilians and that will not be easy. at the same time, mr. obama must ask the russians and the chinese to support nato action and get them on the record. also, the u.s.a. should lay out explicitly how the barbaric iranian government is helping the war criminal assad. if the it president does all those things he will gain a measure of respect throughout the world and perhaps bring down assad. we all understand the situation inside sierra is chaotic. if the world leader key can't allow a tyrant to avoid international law by using chemicals weapons. if gets away from that the world will did i involve into a free fire zone where anything goes. that's the memo. now for the top story tonight. reaction. young is us from a boston colonel hunt. strategic analyst
lt. colonel ralph peters. i understand you disagree with me, correct? >> well, bill, i just don't think american exceptionalism should extent to help al qaeda with our military. and, look, you are absolutely right. that assad is despicable. he is he a monster. he is he a murderer. but you must put things in context. in syria, now, as we speak, the two sides, on one side you have assad, hezbollah, iran, horrible people. on the other side, increasingly dominated by al qaeda, and other islamic extremist, the team that brought you 9/11. now, right now, in syria, our enemies are killing each other. why on earth, where in our constitution does it say we should stop our enemies from killing each other and by the way, i don't like either side in this, but i want somebody to tell me what tangible, strategic or security benefit the united states gets from
intervening in syria. no, obama wants to launch cruise missiles to redeem his personal image. >> bill: be that as it may, you are overlooking the humanitarian issue of a vittle violation of the geneva convention and the use of chemical weapons. if that is allowed to stand, forget about it, it's going to be used all over the world, what say you, colonel hunt? >> the u.s. government, the abercrombie and fitch -- the british and the french has not confirmed the use of chemical weapons. the doctors without borders has. not sure who used the chemical weapons. >> bill: the delivery system of the weapons is almost impossible that you could put it into the rebels or whatever you want to call them. , no, it's not bill. >> bill: colonel? from what i understand israeli intelligence, doctors without borders, and u.s. intelligence now
all say that assad has a cash cache of these weapons and used them. if that's not true. if assad didn't do it it, then, all bets are off o. but we have to aassume that he did do it at this juncture. go ahead, colonel. >> you can assume -- you want to assume chemical weapons are used which i don't. then there is no way. >> bill: you don't even think the poison gas was used? >> i think a terrible thing happened. how, who did it is serious in question. who benefits from this act? >> bill: other governments are saying that the assad regime did it and the doctors on the ground are saying that the gas was used. it's enough for me. >> the docs on the ground have said it was used. we have not got confirmation from u.s. government french and who benefits from this act. >> bill: what about you guys? let's go back to 1940 when the same arguments were being made against intervention in europe that had you a horrible person there, hitler, who was
doing all kinds of war crimes, committing all kinds of atrocities and were maybe 52, 55% of the american public said just what you guys are saying, hey, let's stay out of this. it's not our fight. we shouldn't be doing. this all right? i see parallels there, colonel peters, am i wrong. >> yes, you are absolutely wrong. what you are setting up is a situation if a this f. hitler japanese side or hitler's side. people in syria are all bad. now, colonel hunt is right about the delivery systems. primitive delivery systems could have delivered chemical weapons if the opposition had captured some. and they probably have by now. i don't know who did it. but here's the thing. to a great extent, the use of chemical weapons, which i abhor, is none the less something of a red herring. because, in -- you talk about the geneva conventions, international conventions, all killing of civilians, all targeting of civilians is a war crime.
>> bill: but now we're talking about weapons of mass destruction. it's up to that level and that's the reason we invaded iraq. right? >> would you want to do that again? >> no, i said we cannot make the mistake. can't make the same mistake. >> bill, would you rather be killed by poison gas or tortured to death by al qaeda? >> bill: rather being anything. it's got to be some moral authority in this world. if you allow this kind of an rah tack, you both are saying you don't trust your own government. kerry saying the assad government did it and you are saying you don't believe kerr university secretary of state. you are both saying that, okay? you you don't trust your own government you don't trust your own government. >> we have been so wrong in the past. the national security team that's organizing this. >> bill: it comes down to you don't trust your own government, you don't. >> on this issue we should not. >> if you are proven right and there is some kind of
fix is in to get assad, which i doubt because president obama doesn't want to get anybody, doesn't want to get anybody, i mean, assad is forcing the issue. obama is not a warrior. he doesn't want to go in and get them. he doesn't. >> hunt first and then peters and then i will wrap it, go. >> a third war in 12 years. do it over syria. al qaeda one side and hezbollah on the other and the russians is not for us to do right now. we cannot do a third war in 12 years in the middle east, period. >> bill: all right, peters? >> i trust my government. i do not trust president obama's military judgment. i do not want samantha power our u.n. ambassador making the military policy of the united states. >> that's the government infrastructure right now and you know it very stimulating and charles krauthammer will weigh in on this. a little later on. he has a different opinion next on the rundown. some black americans starting to get upset with the civil rights industry. we have a report on that. and then are religious people less intelligent than atheists?
>> bill: in the impact segment tonights he's we reported last night, saturday's big civil rights event in washington was long on grievance, short on problem solving see my talking points memo from last night on bill o'reilly dot.com. why they are avoiding the collapse of the traditional family. columnist duane wickman made that point. and yesterday the president for the center of enterprise bob woodson was also critical of the civil rights industry. mr. wood son joins us from washington. as you know we have been reporting on this for about
a month. i believe it it's a collapse of the traditional african-american family that's leading to the violence, bad education and chaos in general. am i right or wrong. >> you are right, bill. but there has always been a great divide in the black community over this issue. unfortunately, the civil rights movement of which i was a part in the 60's has declined and morphed into a race grievance industry and booker t. washington at the turn of the century said there are groups of blacks who thrive off the grievance of their fellow blacks. if they lose their grievance they lose their income. unfortunately that's what we have today. >> bill: you believe that extends all the way down to the folks we established last night very very vividly and nobody has challenged it that last saturday's march in washington was funded by the teacher's unions and the money went into al
sharpton's action committee and otherivil rights concerns and there is big money involved. do the rank and file african-american folks in your opinion's the government money to continue to flow and, therefore, get behind the grievance industry? >> as i said, bill, in 1965, bill raspberry, a banner headline on the front page of the "the washington post" said poor negroes are not benefiting from the gains of the civil rights movement. even from back then until today, the interests of the so-called leadership has often been at odds with the rank and file. and this is true on this issue. if you were to take polls, for instance most low income blacks support very muchers for education. the civil rights leadership opposes it. in cincinnati, ohio, for instance, sharpton and others came in when white police officer shot a black
youngster and as a consequence they boycotted the city. well, the police then -- it resulted in police nullification. the police said if i'm going to be accused as a racist then i won't patrol in the black communities. the murder rate went up 800% in one year. it wasn't the sons and daughters of those leaders whose children were in those neighborhoods. and the same thing is occurring in new york where stop and frisk is threatened which means if they are successful, you will see a tick in the murder rate. >> bill: those that live in the black neighborhoods that are affected by stop and frisk the most don't want it. all the polls show that they are supporting the liberal candidates that are going to throw it out. and that's my question. see, nothing is going it get better, i'm giving up on the civil rights industry. there is too much money and they are not going to come around and look out and try to solve any problems. they just not. they are going to blame everything on the white establishment as they always have. i'm trying to rally the regular friend people and
say look, you guys have got to get to the number of the -- nub of the problem. if you are going to have 7 a% out of wedlock births you are going to have chaos and poverty everywhere. get behind it get the pier pressure working against that but it's not happening. >> bill, there are solutions to the problem. for instance, what we do at the center for neighborhood enterprise and other groups are going into those neighborhoods and' visiting those families, the 30% of the families that are raising children that are not dropping out of school or? jail on drugs and we are finding out what is it that is happening in those households that are causing people in toxic neighborhoods to raise children successfully and we must -- and what we are doing is demonstrating when you invest in those neighborhood leaders, and then take steps to help what they do to inspire others through change,
that's what we -- we have to have solutions conferences and bring people together around these remedies. >> you are at loggerheads with the civil rights industry and the liberal white establishment that says we don't want to hear any of that it's all about big government pouring more and more money into the precincts. that hasn't worked. poverty rate is now higher than it was 50 years ago when the war on poverty started. and it's not working. >> it really does. bill. but i still think that we he have demonstrated that in the city of walk, wisconsin, for instance, 25 year low in violence because of the initiatives that we are taking. >> bill: it can work but the word has got to get out. mr. woodson, thanks very much, we appreciate it here is the result of our bill o'reilly.com poll. a a few weeks ago we had had a lively debate with lavar burton on race. he told jesse watters i was condescending to him. does he have a point? 29,000 voted.
>> bill: stossel matter segment tonight, new study out of rochester says religious americans are less intelligent than atheists done by a professor named ryan suckerman who teaches theology. he would not tell us about his religious beliefs or lack thereof. that raises questions. with us is john stossel. i love these guys, myron,
what's your -- and then his two assistants wouldn't tell us either, jordan silverman and judith hall. doesn't that raise red flags off the bad. >> i assume they are religious. >> devil woreshippers or something we need to know that. >> they are scholars. it's not relevant. >> bill: you would assume they are not religious. >> because they are ache deemna. academia i think being religious is the exception. >> bill: i don't know about that but they should certainly have been upfront and full disclosure is always good. what exactly did the study say? they looked at 63 other studies. 63 showed some scientific basis for saying intelligent people higher iq people are less likely to be religious. i looked at it ant kundert find any holes in it but it's soft science. >> what does that mean? soft science? >> how do you really major
intelligence? and you look at some of the conclusions that they include in this thing. you know, why would this be? well, maybe more intelligent people get higher level jobs. they may have higher self-esteem and therefore they believe in more personal control. it just seems soft. >> this is a bunch of goo that they took. >> bill: i'm not overly intelligent but i'm able to incapsulate things it's go they took from a bunch of other studies and extrapolated what they wanted to extrapolate that atheists are smarter. you are not a religious guy, are you? >> no. i would be today support it because i'm obviously much smarter than you and you are religious. >> bill: i wouldn't categorize myself as a religious guy i'm a believer i go to mass every sunday, i try to. i'm not out there with a sign and you are are much, much smarter than i am but that probably is the exception to the rule
because saint thomas aquinas was so much smarter than you it was embarrassing. >> and aristotle and galilee owe and newton and lots of really smart people have been very religious. >> father morist coming up behind is you way smarter than you sandy a catholic priest. >> he just said i should use hit and miss as an example the other direction. >> bill: i'm throwing this study out because number one these pinheads wouldn't tell us where they were coming from. number two they didn't do their own research they relied on go from past studies. >> that kind of analysis is valid. >> bill: can you cherry pick that you can chefery pick out of -- you know what that means because you are very intelligent. can you take a big study that's 1,000 pages and cherry pick anything out you want out of it. if you want to prove that atheists are smarter than religious people, you have got to do your own study, start from scratch and then show people what the basis line is for that. how about that? huh? they taught me that at harvard. i couldn't use other studies from other people. i do my own research. >> they looked at long-term
analysis of 1500 gifted children that's been going on. >> gifted children? what do you mean gifted children? how are they gifted? >> over 135. >> bill: these are all atheists these were all pagans? >> by the way, you go to harvard? >> i went to princeton like harvard. [ laughter ] >> bill: head down like this. >> i didn't learn anything either. >> bill: did you ever he see the football uniform at princeston, embarrassing. john stossel, everybody. talk to charles krauthammer about what should do in syria. that should be interesting. manning wanting sex change treatments in military prison. george zimmerman wanting the state of florida to pay some of its legal bills. ♪
i just pick a charge, like my flight with a few taps, it's taken care of. impressive baldwin. does it work for hotels? absolutely thank goodness. mrs. villain and i are planning our... you scare me. and i like it. let's go what's in your wallet? >> bill: factor following up segment tonight, looks like the immigration bill is stalled in congress right now to. try to speed things up the american catholic church urging congregation to support the bill and some of that will take place in sermons during mass. of course, that raises separation of church and state issues, with us now to discuss the matter fox news religious analyst father jonathan morris. first of all why does the catholic church want to engage in this? why? >> let's look at the situation right now. what we do is we say if you don't have papers, you cannot come in the country, but we're actually going to let you because we are not going to take seriously border security. then once you get here you
can't get a job. but we're going to let you because we are not going to take seriously the enforcement of our laws with employers. and then, once you get a job, once we have allowed you to be here, implicitly, well then we are going to make you live as an illegal. it's unjust system. and, therefore, we as a country have some responsibility. this does not mean it was right or ethical for them to have broken the law and the bishops have been very clear about that but as a country we have some responsibility to the people who have -- who are here right now and many of them,most of them are very hard working people. >> bill: for the catholic church and for you it's about justice. is that what it is about, justice? respect of the dig any of every human being. >> bill: most hispanics, majority of illegal aliens are catholic. you are trying to beep you have your congregation by getting behind the immigration law. a lot of people don't think
it's fair and effective. >> it would be a cynical look as you said, bill. >> bill: you are throwing that out? >> absolutely. the bill itself i don't think most priests know what necessary n. it would i be wrong. done a very good job explaining the points that the church wants to respect. they he have not said it's a perfect law or best opportunity right now to make sure some of the respect that is not shown to hard working immigrants is. >> because at the end of the bill, writers of all kinds of different things have nothing to do with illegal immigration. a bill and a half of this program and bernie sanders put stuff to in there it's got to be redrawn, no doubt about it what about using mass and the pulpit and the sermons to push a sill political dictum? >> it is a fine line. >> are you going to preach about it in your church. >> i would never tell people what to vote for who who to vote for. what i would do it s. underline the moral principles. would we want to the church to have stayed silence, for example on slavery?
would we want the church to stay silent, for example, 10 or 20 years from now if the law says it's okay to kill 2-year-old children, for example? >> no. is an element within the church that is a requirement, obligation of to us speak out. >> i agree with that are you going to preach about this by the way? >> i will preach about the necessity of respecting the dignity of every human person. >> priests say you have got to vote for your bill or call your congressman and vote for this bill it would be wrong. >> i would bring up examples of what they can do. absolutely. >> bill: overarch. the government allowed this to harassment has setly they knew it was happening and allowed it these people are here marshallly because the federal government said come on, even though we are not going it admit to it they absolutely did. so now you have to treat them with dignity. that theme is a fair theme. if you guys are up there saying hey you have got to vote for this bill and call your congressman i'm going to have to cause trouble during mass and you don't want that. >> i don't want you causing
trouble. >> being removed by the hushers. >> anyone suggest this is a partisan thing. >> no, i don't think it's partisan. >> the bishops right now have a lawsuit against the federal government because of the obama care bill. >> i don't think any person would say it's partisan. i think what the folks want. catholics and non-catholics is for the priest to really understand the political implications. father, always good to see you. i'm going to bring you back to discuss your appearance with watters but i don't have time right now. >> you sent your minions out to stalk me and colorado. >> that's a good tease. we'll have the father explain why he was at the america's newsroom festival probably next week. [ laughter ] we come right back is it legal on convicted army private bradley manning wanting sex change therapy in prison. doesn't everybody? charles krauthammer on what america should do about war crimes in syria. the factor continues after these messages.
>> bill: thanks for staying with us, i'm bill o'reilly. in the is it legal segment tonight. three very hot topics including a hun montana high school teacher getting 30 days in jail for raping a 14-year-old girl who then commits suicide. being shocking situation. the ordeal of private bradley manning as you may know he was convicted of he is mean nonsentenced to 35 years in military prison. he mist serve 8 years before is he eligible for parole. now he wants to be called chelsey manning and wants a
sex change therapy paid for by the u.s. government. here to tell us all about it attorneys and fox news legal analyst kimberly guilfoyle and lis wiehl. wiehl, mapg is not expecting the u.s. military to do it they have never done it in history. >> the u.s. military has not. the massachusetts state court did. but, no, it's rarelily done what is he going to argue, he/she is going to argue. under the eighth amendment against cruel and unusual punishment, if you don't give me adequate medical treatment and this he would say this is adequate medical treatment sex change then you government are in trouble. >> all right. in the civil courts, guilfoyle, does the united states government or any of the 50 states required to pay for anybody's sex hormone treatment? >> no. and specifically the spokesman at fort leavenworth said the military prison will not pay for sex reassignment change, gender identity change or hormone therapy.
>> but nobody is compelled in this country, no state entity. >> no. >> is compelled to pay for anybody's sex hormone therapy, nobody? >> i don't think they should be. >> that's chelsea, right that was just up there. >> chelsea, as the "new york times" is now calling her wants to set precedent. wants to be the first person ever to have the u.s. government -- >> -- pay for the sex change. >> bill: in the military. >> hormone treatment. >> hormone treatment. >> he doesn't want equipment change he just wants the hormones to become more feminine and voyeur will you please tus. >> everybody sentenced to military hard labor wants that. i'm not going to get into it i just think it's insane. his attorney says he will sue, right? so the court has to hear this. >> exactly. >> you know what? again, tort reform, then they could just sue the attorney if he brings a frivolous lawsuit and go right back at him and you pay all the costs. >> he can use his own money to pay for this.
75,000 that he collected while he was awaiting trial. >> bill: use his own money. george zimmerman wants the state of florida to reimburse, what? 300,000 in legal expenses? >> up to 300,000 in legal expenses there is a specification here. they do not pay for attorney fees. so the actual hourly cost of the attorneys in this case mark owe mayor remarks they wouldn't pay for that but anything like court deposition, transcripts, animation, things that they used to assist george zimmerman in his defense as long as they are deemed reasonable, should be reimbursed. >> bill: why? does that apply to everybody who is acquitted? >> there is a number of stating that applies to. >> bill: if you are acquitted. >> found not guilty you are entitled to that under the law. nelson will hear the case. >> bill: if you are acquitted of a criminal case. >> in florida. >> not all states? >>. no florida is among just a few states. >> a few states. >> that allow, this right. >> florida and other few states. >> exactly? if you are acquitted you can put into the state reimbursement.
>> for your costs not your attorney fees but your costs. whether he gets it or -- hold defense fund they raised 500,000 that money will go back probably to toes people who donated for him defense fund not zimmerman's pocket himself. >> bill: i don't know that some states had this. >> in the books in florida since 1846. >> bill: wow. >> missouri and louisiana also provide upon acquittal reimbursement. >> bill: just three states? >> um. >>um okay. finally, this is a terrible story, we are sorry we have to report this in the united states but it happens. in montana, a high school teacher rapes a 14-year-old, all right? 14-year-old subsequently commits suicide. her mother says that it was partially due, maybe mostly due to this terrible thing
over the rebels is the support of iran, of russia, he has the shock troops from hezbollah, he has got air power and he has got a feckless west. we can remove air power without a huge campaign, it can be done without flying any airplanes over syria. general keen is outlying a plan where you take the six major air bases and with airplanes that are not flying in syrian airspace, would stand off missiles and navel missiles, you make those six air assets unusable. you destroy the runways, you destroy the planes, the fuel, and you keep hitting these targets until you have eliminated the air advantage that the government -- >> that's the strategy. >> that's a strategy. blow back from iran, blow back from russia, blow back from china. and from many in the arab world.
>> what's russia going to do, cancel another summit? >> i don't know. >> what's iran going to do? does iran want to start a war in the gulf. >> you know what i'm talking about here. there were unintended consequences of military action led by the usa. that's what will hahn and peters object to. if you devalue assad's ability to fight. he might get overthrown, and you'll have al qaeda running the country. why don't you let them all kill each other. how do you answer that? >> that's what was said three years ago, when we had a chance to alter the bounds of the war on the cheap when the jihaddys were not in the war. and everyone said, you know what, they said what we now hear from the naysayers. if you start that the government will fall, al qaeda will come in. al qaeda came in because we did nothing, because we waited. >> let's deal with the reality of today. i say that if you don't punish assad for this war crime -- and
by the way, do you believe that assad used the poison gas? both the colonels are skeptical. do you believe he did? >> i have no reason to believe otherwise, and the fact that different intelligence services and the doctors who don't have an axe to grind one way or another on this -- you're never going to have 100% proof of anything in the world, and you have to make decisions. that's what foreign affairs is all about. look, i don't deny this is a choice between hitler and stalin. we chose to support stalin. the second worst man of the century to defeat the first, and we had to spend 50 years in the cold war undoing the strengthening of the bolsheviks. that's always true, history never ends. you defeat one enemy, there are always others who come again. if you have to choose between undoing the iranian empire, leading its support, and the
pupp puppets in syria -- you do it by the fall of assad, you humiliate iran, you cut off hezbollah, we have a tremendous strategic advance in the fighting of islamic extremism. that's why it's worth doing. >> as always, we appreciate it, tip of the day, how to handle yourself verbally. the tip tw factor tip of the day in a
moment. some verbal advice for you. first, some economic advice. five days left of the giant bill o'reilly summer sale. all our gear deeply discounted. it's embarrassing. folks are saving a ton of money, because gift-giving season is coming up. all the money i get from billo'reilly.com is given to charity. is it nothing to you, o'reilly that the united states may start world war ii in syria? only god can deal with evil, conflict with russia and iran is not the answer. many people in 1940 said the same thing, tim. check it out. damon warring, sydney, australia. after the debacle in iraq, i don't think karl rove is in any position to offer adve on syria. jennifer from denver, i'm a liberal, i do my best to listen to all sides. i agree with you about personal responsibility, disagree when you say everyone can pull
themselves out of poverty. appreciate your letters, jennifer. our system does give middle class status. you earn it does not give status. you earn it. by getting educated and working hard and being honest, if an american does that, he or she will prosper economically, peri period. jake from ohio, bill, spot on about dr. king. no other commentator would be willing to discuss the subject as you do. follow the money, it is shameful. nancy from new york. hate the waters world segment, such a waste of time. nikki davis, my favorite part of the factor is waters world. nancy, monterey, california. i am giving killing kennedy a
thumbs n. way too much information about jfk's affairs. all in context of how the president was governing nancy, sorry the information upsets you, but it is my job to write the truth, and i did. killing kennedy was my favorite book until i read keep it pithy, that was great. i appreciate you reading both books, brad. nice things to say about the audio of keep it pithy this week, once bill o'reilly takes center stage, things get interesting very quickly. it's one that will keep listeners engaged until the very end. thank you for that. how to handle yourself verbally. last week a beauty contestant from san francisco got into a little trouble. >> what do you prefer to have,
if you could only have one and why. would you like me to repeat? >> thank you for that wonderful question. i would pick seeing, because seeing is the sense we can ever see. seeing is believing. and believing is what you see, is perfect. and out of all the senses, seei seeing would really be wonderful. thank you so much. >> sounds like some of the monologues on our cable competition. here's the deal, don't try to b.s. anybody ever. if you are flux axed by a question as that young lady was, say you don't know or kind of laugh and say, you know, i'll
have to think about it, bloviating never works, unless, of course, you are a trained professional like me. factor tip of the day, don't try to b.s. your way out of it, it never works. that is it for us tonight, please check out the foxnews.com website. different from billo'reilly.com. name and town if you wish to opine. word of the day, do not be verecund when writing to the factor. thanks for watching us tonight. remember that the spin stops here. we're definitely looking out for >> today is august 28th. out for we begin with a fox news lart. america on the verge of another war in the mylesed. it could force a strike against
syria this week. we are live in tv widc with the latest. >> there is no place like home especially for this little girl who fought our healthcare system and then won. we have an exclusive sit down with sar ma american han and her family. >> what sparked this intense street scuffle with a photographer? "fox & friends first" starts right now. >> good morning to you. it is wednesday you are watching fox and friends first. i am heather nauertment . >> i am ainsley earhardt. we start with a fox news alert. we could be hours away from a decision to launch a strike on
syria. >> that attack could come as soon as tomorrow. doug luzader is live with the latest. what can you tell us? >> good mother-in-law. it is conceivable. the white house is trying to build a legal and moral case for action in syria while an attack could be just a day or two allay. u.s. war ships on the ready now across the coast of syria. president obama has been strangely silent on this subject in recent days. leaving it to vice president joe biden yesterday to make the case for a war. >> there is no doubt who is responsible for this heinous use of chemical weapons in syria. the syrian regime. >> and the white house is expected to release newly de classified ingenls to make the administration pay for the syrian regime is responsible for a chemical weapons attack killed hundreds last week. at the same time the white house is careful to say bish